Appeal No. 95-1100
Application 07/928,071
second vinyl chloride polymer and a plasticizer.
Specifically, see the reference at column 1, line 61, through
column 2, line 10. There is no express disclosure in
Matsumoto, however, regarding the properties of gel content,
inherent viscosity, and porosity for the vinyl chloride resins
described. In the Answer, the examiner argues that
Matsumoto’s first vinyl chloride resin described at column 2,
line 47, through column 3, line 60, has a high gel content
while Matsumoto’s second vinyl chloride resin disclosed at
column 4, lines 40 through 52, has a low or no gel content,
and appellants have not challenged the examiner’s factual
determinations with respect to the gel content of these prior
art polyvinyl chloride materials.
Implicitly acknowledging that Matsumoto contains no
express disclosure of the properties of inherent viscosity and
porosity for the described vinyl chloride resins, the examiner
contends that it is proper to shift the burden to the
appellants “when the Examiner cannot determine whether or not
the reference product inherently possesses the properties
which render obvious the claimed product but has a basis for
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007